METHODS: A comprehensive search of electronic databases, PubMed, Scopus, Google Scholar, Educational Research Complete, and Journal Storage (JSTOR), will be conducted to identify relevant articles. The search will be limited to articles published in the English language between 2000 and 2023. The search strategy will be designed and adapted for each database using a combination of keywords and subject headings related to personalised learning and health sciences higher education. Eligibility criteria will be applied to screen and select articles. Data extraction and quality assessment will be performed, and thematic synthesis will be used to analyse the extracted data.
DISCUSSION: The results of the scoping review will present a comprehensive and coherent overview of the literature on personalised learning in health sciences higher education. Key themes and topics related to personalised learning, its definitions, models, implementation strategies, benefits, and limitations, will be identified. The geographical and temporal distribution of research on personalised learning in health sciences higher education will also be described. This scoping review will provide a structured synthesis of the available evidence on personalised learning in health sciences higher education, highlighting potential gaps and areas for future research. The findings will contribute to ongoing scholarly and policy debates on personalised learning in higher education, informing the development of best practices, guidelines, and future research agendas.
METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The scoping review will follow Arksey and O'Malley's framework and begin with a literature search using keywords in electronic databases such as PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus and PsychINFO, covering the period from January 2013 to December 2022 and limited to English language publications. Four independent reviewers will screen titles and abstracts based on predefined inclusion criteria, followed by full-text review of selected titles. Relevant references cited in the publications will also be examined. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram will be utilised to illustrate the methodology. Data from selected publications will be extracted, analysed, and categorised for further analysis.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The results of the scoping review will provide a comprehensive overview of the barriers and challenges encountered by oncology MDTs over the past decade. These findings will contribute to the existing literature and provide insights into areas that require improvement in the functioning of MDTs in oncology management. The results will be disseminated through publication in a scientific journal, which will help to share the findings with the wider healthcare community and facilitate further research and discussion in this field.
TRIAL REGISTRATION DETAILS: The protocol for this scoping review is registered with Open Science Framework, available at DOI 10.17605/OSF.IO/R3Y8U.
METHODOLOGY: The scoping review will be carried out in six stages: (1) identifying the research question, (2) identifying relevant studies through electronic databases (i.e., PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Reviews, Google Scholar, EBSCOHOST, Science Direct) and also gray literature, and (3) selection of studies to be included based on inclusion criteria. Search and initial screening of studies to be included will be conducted by two independent reviewers. Discrepancies will then be solved through discussion with other reviewers; (4) charting and categorizing extracted data in a pretested data extraction form; (5) collating, summarizing, and reporting the results; and lastly, (6) conducting consultation with stakeholders and experts in diabetes.
DISCUSSION: This scoping review protocol is aimed to provide a framework enabling us to map and summarize the findings from existing studies involving meal replacement. It will help researchers to identify the research gap and provide recommendations for future meal replacement studies. The results from this scoping review will be useful to various stakeholders in healthcare. It is also part of a research project in which the information obtained will be utilized in a clinical trial of a developed meal replacement plan. Dissemination of knowledge will also be done through presentations at related scientific conferences.
DESIGN: Systematic review and Meta-analysis.
METHODS: We are systematically searching five databases [PubMed, Embase, CT.gov, ICTRP, CINAHL (EBSCO)]. We are following the PRISMA statement and the EPOC guidelines. The meta-analysis will be conducted using Revman-5.4.1 from Cochrane collaboration, UK. This review's protocol was also registered in PROSPERO, University of York, UK (CRD42022299718).
RESULTS: In this meta-analysis, we plan to give a conclusive overview of the available evidence on the efficacy of the medications used to manage gout in reducing COVID-19 mortality, ICU admission, ventilation rate and hospitalization duration. If the results were positive, these drugs would greatly add to the scarce treatment options against COVID-19. Furthermore, these drugs might provide an excellent alternative to inconvenient and expensive drugs. Additionally, most of these drugs have a well-established safety profile for use during nursing, making them a much safer option for nursing mothers with COVID-19.
METHODS: The following databases will be searched: Embase, MEDLINE, Emcare, EPPI-Centre database of health promotion research (BiblioMap) EPPI-Centre Database for promoting Health Effectiveness Reviews (DoPHER), Global Health, CINAHL, Joanna Briggs Institute EBP Database, Maternity and Infant Care Database, Education Resource Information Center, PsycINFO, Scopus, Web of Science and Global Index Medicus, which indexes Latin America and the Caribbean, Index Medicus for the South-East Asia Region, African Index Medicus, Western Pacific Region Index Medicus. Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform, ClinicalTrials.gov, conference proceedings, thesis and dissertations, policy and guidelines and their reference lists will also be searched. Two reviewers will independently screen titles and abstracts and full text based on predefined eligibility criteria. The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews using the Population, Concept and Context framework and the Template for Intervention Description and Replication checklist will be used to structure and report the findings.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics permission to conduct the scoping review is not required as the information collected is publicly available through databases. Findings will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication and conference presentations.